to quote nietaxchse guy...what doesn't destroy them makes them stronger

EDIT:
When you're dealing with things like child abuse, rape, etc. that darkness needs to be brought to light.
I don't want to get into another light and darkness debate with you here, because I'm having one with Hitta on facebook right now.And earlier you failed to address my response to you on this topic in the God thread. So don't address me.
EDIT2: Plus... it will just derail this thread completely.

Yeah I ...thought about it.
If you wana talk about this then do it in the thread where it belongs.

don't think...you just have to experience it. like...if you've ever been fucked up, you know that the next time around you were stronger and beat the fuck out of the person. it may not be rape...it could just be you walking home in the cold. you make more of yourself...and some people out there get addicted to that whether it's walking home in the cold or rape. just like adrenaline junkies put themselves through hell to climb big mountains. you have to go all the way because there's no real line to be drawn between the two other than one based on your intrinsic values...and those are relative.

What you've described is a person in the process of healing, but not having fully overcome themselves.
Once you've fully overcome you will have understood the perpetrator, and feel neutral, and perhaps pity toward them; and then you will only use your strength in self defense, not out of a sadistic need to exact revenge and beat the shit out of them. That said, be as ruthless is as necessary to ensure the karmic cycle of it comes to an end. But sadistically beating the shit out of a perpetrator makes you no different than the perpetrator to begin with, and you only perpetuate the cycles that lead to those violations.
Only here can you find true reconciliation.

The rest of what you say about walking home in the cold ... the meaning of it isnt clear to me.

There is pain present in the universe, there is darkness. It's just not the most fundamental attribute of the universe. As you approach darkness, its light becomes apparent. Pain is neutralized through enlightenment. The cold you experience is driving you to migrate in a certain direction... The pain you experience is telling you not to put your hand too close to a flame... etc.

So beneath all the apparent 'evil'... evil is an illusion, and it's all really good. This is why I rejected your idea of duality in the other thread.
But I am not trying to say that duality doesn't exist. Only that there is the transcendent force; the greater force. It transcends duality. And it is undefinable. You can't polarize it. That force is the most important one, more important than duality or the balances of darkness.

What you've described is a person in the process of healing, but not having fully overcome themselves.
Once you've fully overcome you will have understood the perpetrator, and feel neutral, and perhaps pity toward them; and then you will only use your strength in self defense, not out of a sadistic need to exact revenge and beat the shit out of them. That said, be as ruthless is as necessary to ensure the karmic cycle of it comes to an end. But sadistically beating the shit out of a perpetrator makes you no different than the perpetrator to begin with, and you only perpetuate the cycles that lead to those violations.
Only then have you found true reconciliation.

The rest of what you say about walking home in the cold ... the meaning of it isnt clear to me.

There is pain present in the universe, there is darkness; but that darkness eventually comes to light. It's neutralized through enlightenment. The cold you experience is driving you to migrate in a certain direction... The pain you experience is telling you not to put your hand too close to a flame... etc.

So beneath all the apparent 'evil'... evil is an illusion, and it's all really good. This is why I rejected your idea of duality in the other thread.

Well this thread is dead anyway.

you rejected my idea of duality because you seemed to think that sadism/masochism was based in nature, rather than consciousness...i
believe that's the point you're making again. "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" was never about sadism. It's more about self-overcoming. You're putting too much focus on the perpetrator rather than the ego.

Consciousness divided, as you put it, is an illusion. Consciousness can BE divided. But at its core it's undivided, and transcendental. When Hindus refer to the 'soul', this transcendental consciousness is what they are referencing.

The illusion of division DOES exist; as the illusion of self and other, the illusion of one object from another; the illusion of our existence in material reality is contingent upon these separations. But stripping those illusions away, at its core, reality AND consciousness are transcendental.
Duality is contingent upon the singularity, which IS the transcendent. It's like a house of cards... promote duality as supreme, above transcendence, and your position collapses...

As I read onward, I'm confused by your line "it's more about self-overcoming" - now this appears to be a transcendental argument... my argument against duality. So now I don't even understand your position, or why you're disagreeing with me at all.
Perhaps you just didn't understand my argument, or the flaws in your argument; or the ways which you've led me to misinterpret you, if I have.

The transcendental force is supreme, and all pervasive, and the purest structure of consciousness. Duality is, like our experience of reality, a partial illusion, but also very pervasive...

Right, now take that a step further and you'll see where you've backed yourself in a corner. The illusion is a reality to the extent that intrinsic values are subjective. If the illusion is reality, you have no way to distinguish between being raped and getting caught in the cold walking home. "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is the ego's attempt at solidifying its reality The illusion isn't a reality to the extent that intrinsic values aren't subjective. For the mere fact you can't think of yourself as non-existent, hence there's no illusion. The ego transcends transcendence, so the stronger you become in this life the more powerful you will be in the next.

wtf do you think ubermensch is all about....Animals are slaves to their secrets. A secret is a vulnerability. Golden retrievers sit on command. You didn't reason with them to sit. They didn't learn it from you. Just somebody figured out one day, oh shit, these things sit on command, and people have been exploiting it ever since. The humans have secrets too. Some women, for instance, will deny ever wanting to have sex, but if you touch them in a certain spot when they are on your couch will want to instantly let you fuck them. A retriever can't stop itself from sitting because it has no self-awareness, it has no self-awareness because it lacks subjective experience, it lacks subjective experience because it's not conscious. However, you are not a slave to your secrets. Neither is the person who gets raped.

The mystic teachings in Vedanta are centered on a fundamental truth of the universe that cannot be reduced to a concept or word for the ordinary mind to manipulate. Rather, the human experience and mind are themselves a tiny fragment of this truth. In this tradition, no mind-object can be identified as absolute truth, such that one may say, "That's it." So, to keep the mind from attaching to incomplete fragments of reality, a speaker could use this term to indicate that truth is "Not that."In Vedanta, māyā is to be seen through, like an epiphany (darśana), in order to achieve moksha (liberation of the soul from the cycle of samsara). Ahamkāra (ego-consciousness) and karma are seen as part of the binding forces of māyā. Māyā may be understood as the phenomenal Universe of perceived duality, a lesser reality-lens superimposed on the unity of Brahman. It is said to be created by the divine by the application of the Lilā (creative energy/material cycle, manifested as a veil—the basis of dualism). The sanskaras of perceived duality perpetuate samsara.[citation needed]Maya is often translated as "illusion", since our minds construct a subjective experience, which we are in peril of interpreting as reality. Māyā is the principal deity that manifests, perpetuates, and governs the illusion and dream of duality in the phenomenal Universe. For some mystics, this manifestation is real.[9] Each person, each physical object, from the perspective of eternity, is like a brief, disturbed drop of water from an unbounded ocean. The goal of enlightenment is to understand this—more precisely, to experience this: to see that the distinction between the self and the Universe is a false dichotomy. The distinction between consciousness and physical matter, between mind and body (refer bodymind), is the result of an unenlightened perspective.In Advaita Vedanta[edit]

In Advaita Vedanta philosophy, māyā is the limited, purely physical and mental reality in which our everyday consciousness has become entangled. Māyā is held to be an illusion, a veiling of the true, unitary Self—the Cosmic Spirit also known as Brahman. The concept of māyā was introduced by the ninth-century Hindu philosopher Adi Shankara.[10] He refuses, however, to explain the relationship between Brahman and māyā.[11]Many philosophies and religions seek to "pierce the veil" of māyā in order to glimpse the transcendent truth from which the illusion of a physical reality springs, drawing from the idea that first came to life in the Hindu stream of Vedanta.Māyā is a fact in that it is the appearance of phenomena. Since Brahman is the only truth, māyā is true but not the truth, the difference being that the truth is the truth forever while what is true is only true for now. Since māyā causes the material world to be seen, it is true in itself but is "untrue" in comparison to the Brahman. On the other hand, māyā is not false. It is true in itself but untrue in comparison with the absolute truth. In this sense, reality includes māyā and the Brahman. The goal of spiritual enlightenment ought to be to see Brahman and māyā and distinguish between them. Hence, māyā is described as indescribable. Māyā is avyakta and as Parameshashakti has two principal functions: one is to veil Brahman and obscure and conceal it from our consciousness; the other is to present and promulgate the material world and the veil of duality instead of Brahman. The veil of māyā may be pierced, and, with diligence and grace, may be permanently rent. Consider an illusion of a rope being mistaken for a snake in the darkness. Just as this illusion gets destroyed when true knowledge of the rope is perceived, similarly, māyā gets destroyed for a person when they perceive Brahman with transcendental knowledge. A metaphor is also given—when the reflection of Brahman falls on māyā, Brahman appears as God (the Supreme Lord). Pragmatically, where the duality of the world is regarded as true, māyā becomes the divine magical power of the Supreme Lord. māyā is the veritable fabric of duality, and she performs this role at the behest of the Supreme Lord. God is not bound by māyā, just as magicians do not believe the illusions of their own magic.The following passage is by Sri Shankaracharya:[citation needed]

The Supreme Self (or Ultimate Reality) who is Pure Consciousness perceived Himself by Selfhood (i.e. Existence with "I"-Consciousness). He became endowed with the name "I". From that arose the basis of difference.

He exists verily in two parts, on account of which, the two could become husband and wife. Therefore, this space is ever filled up completely by the woman (or the feminine principle) surely.

And He, this Supreme Self thought (or reflected). Thence, human beings were born. Thus say the (scriptures) through the statement of sageYajnavalkya to his wife.

From the experience of bliss for a long time, there arose in the Supreme Self a certain state like deep sleep. From that (state) māyā (or the illusive power of the Supreme Self) was born just as a dream arises in sleep.

This māyā is without the characteristics of (or different from) Reality or unreality, without beginning and dependent on the Reality that is the Supreme Self. She, who is of the form of the Three Guna (qualities or energies of Nature) brings forth the Universe with movable and immovable (objects).

As for māyā, it is invisible (or not experienced by the senses). How can it produce a thing that is visible (or experienced by the senses)? How is a visible piece of cloth produced here by threads of invisible nature?

Though the emission of ejaculate onto sleeping garments or bedclothes is yielded by the natural experience of copulation in a wet dream, the stain of the garment is perceived as real upon waking whilst the copulation and lovemaking was not true or real. Both sexual partners in the dream are unreal as they are but dream bodies, and the sexual union and conjugation was illusory, but the emission of the generative fluid was real. This is a metaphor for the resolution of duality into lucid unity.

Thus māyā is invisible (or beyond sense-perception). (But) this universe which is its effect, is visible (or perceived by the senses). This would be māyā which, on its part, becomes the producer of joy by its own destruction.

Like night (or darkness) māyā is extremely insurmountable (or extremely difficult to be understood). Its nature is not perceived here. Even as it is being observed carefully (or being investigated) by sages, it vanishes like lightning.

māyā (the illusive power) is what is obtained in Brahman (or the Ultimate Reality). Avidya (or nescience or spiritual ignorance) is said to be dependent on Jiva (the individual soul or individualised consciousness). Mind is the knot which joins consciousness and matter.

Space enclosed by a pot, or a jar or a hut or a wall has their several appellations (e.g., pot space, jar space etc.). Like that, Consciousness (or the Self) covered here by Avidya (or nescience) is spoken of as jiva (the individual soul).

Objection: How indeed could ignorance become a covering (or an obscure factor) for Brahman (or the Supreme Spirit) who is Pure Consciousness, as if the darkness arising from the night (could become a concealing factor) for the sun which is self-luminous?

As the sun is hidden by clouds produced by the solar rays but surely, the character of the day is not hidden by those modified dense collection of clouds, so the Self, though pure, (or undefiled) is veiled for a long time by ignorance. But its power of Consciousness in living beings, which is established in this world, is not veiled

That is a very well written summary of most of what I''m trying to say. But what I find most interesting about the article you posted, Aylen, is this part:

"The mystic teachings in Vedanta are centered on a fundamental truth of the universe that cannot be reduced to a concept or word for the ordinary mind to manipulate. Rather, the human experience and mind are themselves a tiny fragment of this truth. In this tradition, no mind-object can be identified as absolute truth, such that one may say, "That's it." So, to keep the mind from attaching to incomplete fragments of reality, a speaker could use this term to indicate that truth is 'Not that.'"

Brahma.... being infinite, is paradoxical; both the singularity and an infinite field of points, undifferentiated.

"Rather, the human experience and the mind are themselves a tiny fragment of this truth. Our personal perspective".

This part I agree with insofar as the human experience is lost in maya. But on the infinite plane, where we DO exist beyond maya, and where each individual point has a unique perspective, all perspectives are ultimately the same; there is no differentiation in infinite space. In the same way, as we all see through illusion, the truth we see beyond illusion is the same for all.

Brahma.... being infinite, is paradoxical; both the singularity and an infinite field of points, undifferentiated. "Rather, the human experience and the mind are themselves a tiny fragment of this truth. Our personal perspective". This part I agree with insofar as the human experience is lost in maya. But on the infinite plane, where we DO exist beyond maya, and where each individual point has a unique perspective, all perspectives are ultimately the same; there is no differentiation in infinite space. In the same way, as we all see through illusion, the truth we see beyond illusion is the same for all.

interesting. so in your view, the person who gets raped is simply an extension of the rapist.
all is one, hence nothing is gained nor lost for the person being raped. in mine the person who gets raped chooses wehther to be a victim or to grow stronger as a result of the rape. your non-dualistic viewpoint inevitably leads to...she should just let herself get raped because at the end of the day, she is the rapist and the rapist is her. And here's the real shitkicker...maya, brahma and that entire 'all is one' cult arose out of a need to justify passive submission to rape

Right, now take that a step further and you'll see where you've backed yourself in a corner. The illusion is a reality to the extent that intrinsic values are subjective. If the illusion is reality, you have no way to distinguish between being raped and getting caught in the cold walking home. "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" is the ego's attempt at solidifying its reality The illusion isn't a reality to the extent that intrinsic values aren't subjective. For the mere fact you can't think of yourself as non-existent, hence there's no illusion. The ego transcends transcendence, so the stronger you become in this life the more powerful you will be in the next.

Geezus, self-overcoming is where you draw the line between yourself and other animals. wtf do you think ubermensch is all about....Animals are slaves to their secrets. A secret is a vulnerability. Golden retrievers sit on command. You didn't reason with them to sit. They didn't learn it from you. Just somebody figured out one day, oh shit, these things sit on command, and people have been exploiting it ever since. The humans have secrets too. Some women, for instance, will deny ever wanting to have sex, but if you touch them in a certain spot when they are on your couch will want to instantly let you fuck them. A retriever can't stop itself from sitting because it has no self-awareness, it has no self-awareness because it lacks subjective experience, it lacks subjective experience because it's not conscious. However, you are not a slave to your secrets. Neither is the person who gets raped.

...Our transcendent will longs to overcome being caught in the cold; to avoid being raped; to return to a state of nirvana; that state of infinite dissolution. Like I said, when your hand is too close to a flame, the purpose of the pain is to compel you to move your hand away from the flame. Removing your hand from the flame is a transcendent step; you take a step closer to nirvana; you dissolve maya. Now if you were to just plunge your whole body into flames, like you're suggesting, because nothing matters either way (did you by chance steal this thought from crowley? It doesn't seem well formed by you); or if you shoot someone in the head, because we're all infinite points and nothing matters... Well it DOES matter, because here you only further expand the illusions of maya. You generate karmic processes which demand resolution.. you will be reincarnated and you will then have to realize your ignorance, and work that karma off.

Obey the laws of nature and life will unravel itself for you, as you approach bliss. Act contrary to nature, through ignorance, (or arrogance, or apathy, as the case may be), and you actually EXPAND maya. THus you create karma for yourself, and will face those consequences.

But perhaps for you it doesn't matter. Maybe your pain threshold is higher than the rest of us, and you actually prefer pain and suffering. Maybe you don't wish to approach Nirvana. I prefer to enjoy life, and for those around me to enjoy life. I prefer at least try to approach nirvana... I don't prefer to delve further into illusion and pain. But ... it's a choice you make. Certainly we are here, and pain exists; it's an intrinsic part of nature, and maya. You ARE free to do as you will. I don't condemn your ignorance. I just prefer enlightenment.. and I think ultimately everyone does. Everything returns to the source, in the end.
Perhaps there is a place for embracing ignorance, to realize the NEED for enlightenment.
I'm ultimately apathetic to both sides of this, but myself I prefer intelligence to stupidity.

oh, you're just referring to the burden of the I. See...you were an infant once and at some point you became aware of yourself. I was like fuck yeah. for you it's like "fuck no, I want to be an infant again"...then you spent years in childhood trying to reexperience eternity. I enjoyed being in the here and now. what you call longing to return to a state of dissolution is merely your desire to go back to sucking milk out of a breast, except you've just idealized that state to the extent you've turned it into a philosophy as a way to distract yourself from the burden of the I and the reality that competition is the natural state. Stealing is justified on the grounds that if it bothers the person its stolen from they or one of their proxies can always make a claim for it....one of the myths cultivated by Brahma's illusion of kharma is that you, I or anybody else actually owes something to people. Pt barnum said a sucker is born every minute so you can let go of brahma's kharma myth...truth is you don't owe anybody shit. remember that competition is the natural state, so it's a nice thing when embarking upon any new competitive venture to establish some familiarity for interested parties. "All is one" was an attack on the individual will. It was never supposed to be anything more than a means of trying to put a check on the constiutionally strong by glorifying the passivity of the person being raped. i make the laws. roll over then you've not done anything to become more powerful in the next life. that's a heavy weight to carry, but hey, I'm not the one whose got to carry it.

So me not wanting my hand burned in flames; preferring to pull it away from the flames, is ... equal to me wanting to go suck milk out of my mothers teet. Well, how about we let evolution settle this debate for us. Is a burnt, blistered hand favorable for survival? Is a woman being raped and thrown in the woods statistically favorable for her unborn childs survival?
........
I'm tired of deciphering your walls of scrambled, schizotypal tangents. You can fuck off now. Bye

So me not wanting my hand burned in flames; preferring to pull it away from the flames, is ... equal to me wanting to go suck milk out of my mothers teet. Well, how about we let evolution settle this debate for us. Is a burnt, blistered hand favorable for survival? Is a woman being raped and thrown in the woods statistically favorable for her unborn childs survival?
........
I'm tired of deciphering your walls of scrambled, schizotypal tangents. You can fuck off now. Bye

wow. you're such an enlightened soul, telling me to fuck off.

here's a hint. i made the post intentionally hard to follow so I can lose the interest of 90 percent of the forum. You can look at it from 3 parts. the first part gives you some insight into your state of dissolution pretence, the second part addresses your claim that I may have stolen these ideas from Aleister Crowley (I thought all was one in your eyes) and the 3rd part takes another look at the rape scenario through dualistic versus nondualistic lens. your reply shows that you don't yet understand what you're even arguing about.

If you get raped, Sex is going to be a bit scary. You can't expect someone like that to be aggressive. They're afraid.

And why they can end up with abusers continually, well most people end up in abusive relationships continually. Whether or not they realize it is another matter.

Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.

"But the bulk of psychological research on the topic shows that, as a rule, if you are stronger after hardship, it is probably despite, not because of the hardship. The school of hard knocks does little more than knock you down, hard. Nietzschian--and country song--wisdom notwithstanding, we are not stronger in the broken places. What doesn't kill us in fact makes us weaker.
...
And this is true for humans as well. Mayhem and chaos don't toughen you up, and they don't prepare you well to deal with the terror of this world. Tender love and care toughen you up, because they nurture and strengthen your capacity to learn and adapt, including learning how to fight, and adapting to later hardship."

the psychologytoday stuff is looked at through the lens of lawful goods. the author sounds like a superego type. freud's superego type correlates best with the lawful goods, egos with the neutrals, and id with the chaotics. let's put aside that psychology itself is full of NP style-conjecture...mainstream psychology's assumptions are biased towards promoting/justifying/furthering a civil-collective-rational-bureaucratic ordering of society, the fem-nazi tender, love, and care slant only showed up post 70s.those intrinsic values are one-sided, relative and arbitrary, with an aim towards constructing/justifying a certain perspective, meaning, psychology was a symptom of civilization. you have to first negate civilization. once you negate civilization, all that lovey-dovey feel good psychology today stuff crashes down on itself.

interesting. so in your view, the person who gets raped is simply an extension of the rapist.
all is one, hence nothing is gained nor lost for the person being raped.

You have embedded duality (the rapist and the victim) into my concept of Brahma and thus corrupted it. Duality itself is Maya. This has nothing to do with Brahma. You miss the point entirely.

Originally Posted by Kill4Me

your non-dualistic viewpoint inevitably leads to...she should just let herself get raped because at the end of the day, she is the rapist and the rapist is her. And here's the real shitkicker...maya, brahma and that entire 'all is one' cult arose out of a need to justify passive submission to rape, and all the other patriarchal abuses, that were going on at the time.

Now you go on to horribly mischaracterize my position with the above flawed logical interpretation. I'll take these in point:
-No, she shouldn't let her self be raped. She should run from the rapist, because that is the 'transcendent' path toward nirvana (how many times can I use that word 'transcendent'?)
-No, the rapist shouldn't be raping people. He should stop it, because that is also the 'transcendent' thing to do (x2)
-When rape DOES happen it is a product of MAYA, or of dualistic illusion. You have the victim and the perpetrator stuck in their respective roles.
-Yes, in MAYA, the victim plays a karmic role which lead to her being raped. I'm sure if this offends you... it offends alot of people. We can talk about this in greater detail if you wish.
-The rapist is lost in Maya; he has no awareness of Brahma. Maya is ultimately an illusion. Eventually the rapist realizes the error of his ways. At this point he repents, he works off his karma, he ceases to be just a 'rapist'. The whole argument is about transcending maya, not embracing it.
-Now you get onto a soap box ... characitactures about Brahman cults and monotheism as part of a hidden rapist agenda... gross propaganda aimed at eager crowds. As I have shown you, the rapist and the rape victim must both transcend their pain; their illusions and their ignorance; and return to their natural human state, being neither a victim or a perpetrator, but having that transcendental (5?) consciousness called Brahma.

On another note... when you are born into the world; into illusion, you ARE corrupted by it. That's unavoidable... That's the concept of original sin, and it's also part of hinduism. Sometimes the victim can't ESCAPE the perpetrator (such as the case with child abuse). So our lives are a search to return to bliss... we are separated from it.

the psychologytoday stuff is looked at through the lens of lawful goods. the author sounds like a superego type. freud's superego type correlates best with the lawful goods, egos with the neutrals, and id with the chaotics. let's put aside that psychology itself is full of NP style-conjecture...mainstream psychology's assumptions are biased towards promoting/justifying/furthering a civil-collective-rational-bureaucratic ordering of society, the fem-nazi tender, love, and care slant only showed up post 70s.those intrinsic values are one-sided, relative and arbitrary, with an aim towards constructing/justifying a certain perspective, meaning, psychology was a symptom of civilization. you have to first negate civilization. once you negate civilization, all that lovey-dovey feel good psychology today stuff crashes down on itself.

My bad. Of course we wouldn't want any kind of actual research distract the internet nerds posting from their parent's homes from indulging in their idealized fantasies of an uncivilized lawless society, where if push came to shove they would be the first ones to perish being so torn from reality and maladapted to life due to spending too much time in a secure environment inseparable from their computer screens.

you progress after hardships in ways that can be adaptive or maladaptive to your current circumstances. i dunno if its usually one or the other. but i think the cliche here in the title is just to make people feel better about life sucking sometimes.

I'd bet 2 to 1 odds that you take any random person that has not had life break them down, bust their balls, and instill in them a groundedness of how hard the world can really be... That person will not have strong character.

Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.

You have embedded duality (the rapist and the victim) into my concept of Brahma and thus corrupted it. Duality itself is Maya. This has nothing to do with Brahma. You miss the point entirely.

Funny. You don't truly represent a non-dualistic point of view. If you did, you wouldn't be employing hyper-competitive tactics with me in debate. I'm not even the one who introduced the term 'rape victim'...You did. I'm just correcting your false assumptions. Don't you think it's rather ironic how you argue that 'all is one' and 'god is everywhere' yet make the distinction between myself and crowley. So don't blame me for corrupting the concept when it would be clear as day that it is YOU who is corrupting it.

But hey, don't come down too hard on yourself. It was already corrupted. "All in one" is the Joe Stalin of philosophical ideas. It supplied the justification for government executions and governmental control. The idea was you can't truly murder off a part of yourself because everything is connected, therefore killing isn't actually killing. This was also the idea that justified rape. You're not willing to go there because you're not being true to your non-dualistic point of view. You say you are but when it comes down to it you're not ready to go all the way.

Now you go on to horribly mischaracterize my position with the above flawed logical interpretation.

I haven't mischaracterized your position. I've only taken it to its conclusion. You're unwilling to go there because you have 'limits'. To you, I'm mischaracterizing it becuase I"m not recognizing your limits. Your 'limits' are based in your intrinsic values. Intrinsic values are relative so your limits aren't based in reality. Hence, I see no reason that your position, nor any position, can't be properly characterized by taking it to its conclusion.

I'll take these in point:
-No, she shouldn't let her self be raped. She should run from the rapist, because that is the 'transcendent' path toward nirvana (how many times can I use that word 'transcendent'?)
-No, the rapist shouldn't be raping people. He should stop it, because that is also the 'transcendent' thing to do (x2)
-When rape DOES happen it is a product of MAYA, or of dualistic illusion. You have the victim and the perpetrator stuck in their respective roles.
-Yes, in MAYA, the victim plays a karmic role which lead to her being raped. I'm sure if this offends you... it offends alot of people. We can talk about this in greater detail if you wish.
-The rapist is lost in Maya; he has no awareness of Brahma. Maya is ultimately an illusion. Eventually the rapist realizes the error of his ways. At this point he repents, he works off his karma, he ceases to be just a 'rapist'. The whole argument is about transcending maya, not embracing it.
-Now you get onto a soap box ... characitactures about Brahman cults and monotheism as part of a hidden rapist agenda... gross propaganda aimed at eager crowds. As I have shown you, the rapist and the rape victim must both transcend their pain; their illusions and their ignorance; and return to their natural human state, being neither a victim or a perpetrator, but having that transcendental (5?) consciousness called Brahma.

Wtf...you're still talking about Karma. Stop! It doesn't exist. Stalin already disproved the theory of karma when he died of old age. I suspect what you're seeing as karma are just common occurrences in nature. For example, most dictators get overthrown, coup de'tat, hung in the public square, assasination. It would seem to be one of those secrets that comes with lusting for total power. Remember, I talked to you about golden retrievers having secrets before. And I would agree that's the natural order. The natural order can be destroyed, though. Stalin showed that if a dictator is ruthless enough he is able to overcome it...Again, in a really warped way, that leads you back into "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" as self-overcoming.

you progress after hardships in ways that can be adaptive or maladaptive to your current circumstances. i dunno if its usually one or the other. but i think the cliche here in the title is just to make people feel better about life sucking sometimes.

Funny. You don't truly represent a non-dualistic point of view. If you did, you wouldn't be employing hyper-competitive tactics with me in debate. I'm not even the one who introduced the term 'rape victim'...You did. I'm just correcting your false assumptions. Don't you think it's rather ironic how you argue that 'all is one' and 'god is everywhere' yet make the distinction between myself and crowley. So don't blame me for corrupting the concept when it would be clear as day that it is YOU who is corrupting it.

I'm not arguing for absolute transcendence with the abolishment of Maya or duality... I'm only arguing that transcendence IS supreme, and the foundation of duality. ...Your personal criticism me is not logically relevant to this discussion, either. I'm interested in the issue of transcendence as being the basis of reality. Let's stay on that.
I fully believe that Maya and duality EXIST, and I am a part of it. I'm not claiming to be a Sun-God, either. THerefor... I have every right to delve further into Maya as I so please...
So fuck you. There, I delved into Maya.

I am simply laying the foundations of philosophy for you, to further your understanding and refine my own. You should thank me.

Dude... everything I've said to you is actually repeated verbatum in that Hindu link up there. Go reread that. Fuck, argue with that instead of me. I'm getting tired.

Originally Posted by Kill4Me

But hey, don't come down too hard on yourself. It was already corrupted. "All in one" is the Joe Stalin of philosophical ideas. It supplied the justification for government executions and governmental control. The idea was you can't truly murder off a part of yourself because everything is connected, therefore killing isn't actually killing. This was also the idea that justified rape. You're not willing to go there because you're not being true to your non-dualistic point of view. You say you are but when it comes down to it you're not ready to go all the way.

I JUST addressed this ... you already raised this issue in your last post. I gave you like 10 bullet points on it. Now here you are giving virtually the same example. Why do I try? I guess I learn something from this process. That's why I try. Really, what other reason is for me to continue?

I like that lungs is on your side now, too. Hahahaaa. You're ahead of me in 'constructives' now, dude.

Originally Posted by Kill4Me

I haven't mischaracterized your position. I've only taken it to its conclusion. You're unwilling to go there because you have 'limits'. To you, I'm mischaracterizing it becuase I"m not recognizing your limits. Your 'limits' are based in your intrinsic values. Intrinsic values are relative so your limits aren't based in reality. Hence, I see no reason that your position, nor any position, can't be properly characterized by taking it to its conclusion.

This... is just a bunch of undefined babble... I don't even know what you're trying to say here. Rephrase it. I'm not deciphering it.

Originally Posted by Kill4Me

Wtf...you're still talking about Karma. Stop! It doesn't exist. Stalin already disproved the theory of karma when he died of old age.

Karma is just .... causality. Time cycles unraveling. I am astounded you actually state it doesn't exist.
Maybe you're confused about what Karma is....?
If you do not exercise for years, your "Karma" may catch up with you in the form of disease, fatigue, missed opportunities to meet people... or SOMETHING. That's Karma.
The Hindus believe reincarnation prolongs the Karmic process across many lifetimes. But even if you don't believe in reincarnation, it is irrelevant.
These causal cycles happen on many levels of time and scale. A daily level, a weekly level, a yearly level, etc. An individual level, a communal level, a national level, etc..
The question of Stalin escaping Karma is absurd... you cannot escape cause and effect. What's more, effects set in motion immediately, although realized eventually, also gradually degrade the moment throughout the time cycle.
Stalin was one individual part of a massive machine. Do you know anything about Stalin the individual to really judge his individual karma? I only know him through the mass image of Stalin which has been presented to me; and which really represents the governmental machine...
I just kinda doubt you know all that much about Russian history & culture to even make a sound judgment about Stalin.
There's a similar histrionic, dogmatic attitude held toward hiTTler which is totally ignorant of history and hiTTlers real motives. hiTTler was, despite our collective cries to the contrary, of reasonably sound mind given certain biases.
It may so happen, upon REALLY studying history, that Stalin wasn't quite so "insane" given the conditions in Russia, his circumstances, his viewpoint on what was best... etc.
Point is nothing about Karma requires Stalin die in misery, and you don't understand what Karma is, or who Stalin the individual was.

Originally Posted by Kill4Me

I suspect what you're seeing as karma are just common occurrences in nature.

For example, most dictators get overthrown, coup de'tat, hung in the public square, assasination. It would seem to be one of those secrets that comes with lusting for total power. Remember, I talked to you about golden retrievers having secrets before. And I would agree that's the natural order. The natural order can be destroyed, though. Stalin showed that if a dictator is ruthless enough he is able to overcome it...Again, in a really warped way, that leads you back into "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger" as self-overcoming.

This is still almost indecipherable. I don't see how having secrets relates to this discussion. I don't see how being ruthless relates to this discussion. Stalin didn't overcome anything. He was subjected to Karma, like everyone. You know next to nothing about Stalin the individual, you talk about him in this mass hysterical way like it has meaning. I don't know what to say anymore.

I'm not arguing for absolute transcendence with the abolishment of Maya or duality... I'm only arguing that transcendence IS supreme, and the foundation of duality. ...Your personal criticism me is not logically relevant to this discussion, either. I'm interested in the issue of transcendence as being the basis of reality. Let's stay on that.
I fully believe that Maya and duality EXIST, and I am a part of it. I'm not claiming to be a Sun-God, either. THerefor... I have every right to delve further into Maya as I so please...
So fuck you. There, I delved into Maya.

I am simply laying the foundations of philosophy for you, to further your understanding and refine my own. You should thank me.

Dude... everything I've said to you is actually repeated verbatum in that Hindu link up there. Go reread that. Fuck, argue with that instead of me. I'm getting tired.

Fine, let's get back to it. Your main point was that, according to your philosophy of non-dualism, violations don't exist because all is one. Therefore, rape is not a violation of another person's being since their being has no separate reality from the rapist. You've embraced non-dualism. Hence, that's your position since there is no in between between dualism and non-dualism. I'm willing to go to the end with dualism. You're not with yours. That's why I don't have to go over the link. I've already done all the deducing there is to do. That means I'm light years ahead of you and that link. Take your level of wisdom at this moment, I was born years ahead of that, even, and I've only been tapping you with kid gloves on, imagine if I was using two hands instead of running marathons around you with one hand tied behind my back.

This... is just a bunch of undefined babble... I don't even know what you're trying to say here. Rephrase it. I'm not deiphering it.

You need me to rephrase it because you lack the willpower to impose your own meaning onto what I said. In that big paragraph I posted earlier today, my post was nothing more than an act of will. I've broken your will down to the point you now rely on me to rephrase things so you have something to respond with. What you're lacking is a more powerful frame of reality. If you had a more powerful frame of reality you would automatically simplify what I said down to the level of understanding, just so you could have an outlet to push your frame through. Your constriction of will shows that you're operating out of "poverty mind." Poverty mind constricts your ability to generate self-initiated insights. Hence, you start vigilantly scanning at deeper levels for understanding and knowledge of what others have to say. Your last post was showing signs of you being fully locked inside reptilian-brain, where your capacity to think is purely reactive, and you've lost the will to self-initiate...things start to look like babble that before would have seemed to be an outlet for a point you wanted to drive home...and you become dependent on your interlocutor to decipher, rephrase, define. Physiologically, you might have experienced that as a confused, tightening up of your eyebrows. Poverty mind occurs when the interlocutor has captured your perceptions. In this case, that interlocutor would be me.

I'm not even going to bother responding to the rest of your post. You've fallen into the same trap the revisionists made in trying to bundle stalin with hxtler, and I can't even take credit for being the one to walk you into that trap. Come back when you can do more than parrot stuff verbatim out of that hindu link.

...I don't know how I can be any more clear. What you've summarized as my position is NOT my position. Like I said to you, very clearly, the rapist must transcend his illusions, and his behavior, through the realization of Brahma; likewise for the victim (who plays a karmic role), they must at least attempt to flee the rapist (transcending), and also overcome those karmic processes which put her in dubious situations (this is often the case, but not always).

Do you not understand that singularity IS transcendent?..... (I really should find a new word for transcendent. Time to consult a thesaurus.)

In the same way you cannot measure the exact circumference of Pi, because its value is transcendental. Do you know what an ouroboros is?
An Ouroborus is a hugely important occult symbol. See:wwwwww.jpg
And what this represents is this oscillating singularity. It represents the transcendental . It represents Pi
The HEAD of the dragon is the singular point. The singular point oscillates around itself... 'swallowing its own tail' as it were.
This symbol is describing the most basic, self-oscillating point; the fundamental structure of reality.
The dragons head orbits the circumference of himself.
Do you understand this is the essence of transcendence?

Now, if you divide this circle in half - duality... You are then able to ATTEMPT to measure the circumference of the circle. But you will never succeed, and the circumferences value WILL ALWAYS BE unmeasurable.

And I do NOT reject dualism. I simply see it as an illusion; the illusion of ALL MEASUREMENT; a power LESS fundamental to reality than the transcendental.

I don't think I can be any more clear.

And keep those self-affirming, masturbatory pep talks to yourself... they have no relevance to this discussion and I don't want to hear them. I don't care. Focus on the issue.

I can't help but notice you said NOTHING about karma in your last post. ... after all that. The silence speaks volumes.

What is Advaita, or nonduality? Advaita means nondual or "not two." This oneness is a fundamental quality of everything. Everything is a part of and made of one nondual conciousness. Often the question arises, "If it is all one thing, why don’t I experience it that way?" This is confusing oneness for the appearance of sameness. Things can appear different without being separate. Just look at your hand for a moment. Your fingers are all different from each other, but are they separate? They all arise from the same hand. Similarly, the objects, animals, plants and people in the world are all definitely different in their appearance and functioning. But they are all connected at their source—they come from the same source. This one Being that is behind all life has an infinite number of different expressions that we experience as different objects.

To continue with the hand analogy, your fingers are all made of the same substance. They are made up of similar tissues, cells, atoms, and at the deepest level, subatomic particles. Similarly, when your experience of reality becomes more subtle, you discover that everything is just different expressions of one field of nondual Being. Below is a wonderful little story about the meaning and definition of nonduality or Advaita written by Dennis Waite (of advaita.org.uk) that explores this in more depth.

But what about your experience right now? Is it possible to realize this subtle oneness or nonduality in ordinary experience? It is, if you set aside the expectation of a dramatic awakening to the experience of oneness and explore the nondual nature of reality a little bit at a time. Just as even a single drop of water is wet, you can experience oneness in even simple everyday experiences, since oneness is a fundamental quality of everything that exists.

As an experiment, just notice your fingers and the palm of your hand. Can you say where one starts and the other ends, or are they one thing? To take this further, where does your hand stop and your forearm begin? Can you experience the oneness of your hand and your forearm? If these are not separate, then what about other parts of your body? Are your feet and your ears really one even though they are so different? Now notice if there really is a separation between your thoughts and your head. Where does your head stop and something else called thought begin? What about feelings or desires? Are they really separate from you or your body?

Now, notice the simple sensations you are having: the sounds you are hearing, the sensations of touch, and the objects and events you are seeing. If you are seeing something, where does the seeing stop and something else called the eye begin? If you are hearing sounds, where does the sound start and the ear stop? Perhaps the hearing, the sound, and your ear are all one thing. Yes, the ear is different from the sound, but in the act of hearing, they become one thing.

Then, where does the source of the sound stop and the sound itself start? For example, if a bird is singing outside your window, where does the bird stop and the sound of its song begin? Or are they one thing? If the bird and its song are one thing, and your hearing and the song are one thing, then is it possible that you and the bird are also one thing?

Nondual consciousness is the natural state.
The Advaita truth of nondual consciousness, or oneness of Being, has often been thought of as something hidden or difficult to experience, when it is quite ordinary and available in every moment. Nondual consciousness is the natural state. Of course, a dramatic experience of oneness is a rare event. But why wait for something so rare when this sweet and satisfying oneness is right here, right now?"